A federal judge on Friday held the Department of Homeland Security(DHS) in contempt for deporting E.L.A., a 19 year old asylum seeker, to El Salvador in violation of three court orders. She ordered the government to bring him back. U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher of Maryland, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, barred officials from removing him again until immigration authorities make a final decision on his asylum claim or the class action settlement protecting him expires. Both sides must update the court by Oct. 2.
This was the second time the government deported him. He was removed once in March and flown back in August after officials confirmed he was protected. In early September he was put on another flight while he sat in a Louisiana detention center, waiting to finish a psychological evaluation for his asylum case.
Why did the judge hold DHS in contempt?
The government violated orders she issued on Nov. 25, 2024, April 23, 2025, and July 29, 2026. Those orders come from J.O.P. v. DHS, a class action filed in 2019 by young people who entered the country as unaccompanied minors and wanted their asylum cases heard by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. A settlement approved in 2024 bars their removal while those claims are pending.
What does the DHS contempt ruling require?
The government must return E.L.A. and give him, his immigration lawyer and class counsel three days’ notice before he arrives. It must also return the property and documents taken from him. Before any future removal attempt, it must give five business days’ notice and name the legal authority behind it. The order does not guarantee him asylum. It guarantees that his claim gets heard.
How was he deported a second time?
That question has not been fully answered. His lawyers realized something was wrong when a scheduled video appointment was canceled. Later that day, relatives told them he had contacted family from El Salvador. The government later admitted the removal and blamed communication errors. In early September, Gallagher demanded answers to eight questions, including who decided to move him out of detention and who decided to put him on the plane to San Salvador.
DHS tells a different story. A department spokesperson told Newsweek that he asked for voluntary departure after arriving at an ICE field office and that he had entered the country illegally in 2023.
Is this part of a bigger pattern?
The court’s own findings point that way. In her July ruling, Gallagher found the government had removed at least 107 people covered by the settlement. That included 54 confirmed class members and 53 more whom the government’s own files had flagged as potentially protected. She held the agencies in contempt at the time and ordered ICE to check its database for class member flags before any deportation. She also wrote that showing good faith after a violation does not undo it. About five weeks later, E.L.A. was put on a plane anyway.
What happens next in the DHS contempt case?
Two deadlines matter. By Oct. 2, both sides must tell the court whether E.L.A. wants to return and, if so, how that will happen. Gallagher also sealed the memorandum explaining her reasoning and gave lawyers one week to propose redactions. Once that opinion is public, it could show exactly where the safeguards broke down and whether anyone will be held responsible.
